DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/17/2025 and 12/02/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “800” (see pages 36-38 paragraphs [0203]-[0213]);
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “antenna 1 and antenna 2” (see pages 36-37 paragraphs [0203]-[0207]).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because uses phrases which can be implied, such as, “This disclosure discloses,” (see line 1). A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Examiner’s Note
See European Search Opinion dated 10/17/2025 of EP23851594 attached to the preset Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 6-12 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rusek (WO 2022/106139).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Rusek discloses receiving, by a network device, a first receiving time difference from a terminal device, wherein the first receiving time difference indicates a difference between a time at which the terminal device receives a first reference signal and a time at which the terminal device receives a second reference signal, the first reference signal is sent to the terminal device by a satellite, and the second reference signal is sent to the terminal device by the satellite (abstract, figure 1 claim 24; “a user equipment, UE, for facilitating positioning of the UE in a communication network comprising a non-terrestrial access network of satellite-based access nodes, the method comprising: receiving at least two references signals which are transmitted at different occasions from the same satellite-based access node at different satellite trajectory positions; obtaining, for each received reference signal, a time stamp of reception and a reference signal occasion identifier conveyed in the reference signal, for calculation of a UE position”, claims 1, 5, page 17, line 23 - page 18, line 22; the measurement report is provided as RSTD/TDOA); obtaining, by the network device, a first time interval, wherein the first time interval indicates a time interval between a moment at which the satellite sends the first reference signal and a moment at which the satellite sends the second reference signal (abstract, figure 1 claim 24; "Receiving, from a satellite-based access node of a non-terrestrial access network of the communication network, configuration information for a plurality of reference signal occasions occurring at different satellite trajectory positions"; claims 14, 19-22; each reference signal conveys a reference signal occasion identifier and the configuration information for the reference signal occasions indicates periodicity of the reference signal transmission, page 13, line 17 - page 14, line 2; page 18, lines 7-12; fig. 6; each reference signal occasion identifier relates to a time stamp of transmission the reference signal from the NTN TRP, allowing the positioning node to determine where the NTN TRP was located and the time stamp of transmission at the respective reference signal occasion. The periodicity of the reference signal transmission corresponds to the first time interval); obtaining, by the network device, first coordinates and second coordinates, wherein the first coordinates indicate a location at which the satellite sends the first reference signal, and the second coordinates indicate a location at which the satellite sends the second reference signal (abstract, figure 1 claim 24; “a user equipment, UE, for facilitating positioning of the UE in a communication network comprising a non-terrestrial access network of satellite-based access nodes, the method comprising: receiving at least two references signals which are transmitted at different occasions from the same satellite-based access node at different satellite trajectory positions; obtaining, for each received reference signal, a time stamp of reception and a reference signal occasion identifier conveyed in the reference signal, for calculation of a UE position, claims 1, 5, page 17, line 23 - page 18, line 22; the measurement report is provided as RSTD/TDOA); and determining, by the network device, first location information based on the first coordinates, the second coordinates, the first time interval, and the first receiving time difference, wherein the first location information is location information of the terminal device that is obtained by the network device through measurement (abstract, figure 1 claim 24; “a user equipment, UE, for facilitating positioning of the UE in a communication network comprising a non-terrestrial access network of satellite-based access nodes, the method comprising: receiving at least two references signals which are transmitted at different occasions from the same satellite-based access node at different satellite trajectory positions; obtaining, for each received reference signal, a time stamp of reception and a reference signal occasion identifier conveyed in the reference signal, for calculation of a UE position, claims 1, 5, page 17, line 23 - page 18, line 22; the measurement report is provided as RSTD/TDOA).
PNG
media_image1.png
402
599
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Rusek discloses claims 1 and 11, Rusek also discloses a ground base station and the satellite; or the network device comprises the satellite (figure 1 page 5 line 13 to page 6 line 4)
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Rusek discloses claims 1 and 11, Rusek also discloses determining, by the network device based on a first beam direction, the first reference signal and the second reference signal that correspond to the first receiving time difference, the first beam direction is a beam direction in which the terminal device sends the first receiving time difference to the satellite, and determining, by the network device, the first time interval based on the sending time of the first reference signal and the sending time of the second reference signal (figure 8 page 20 lines 5-27 “The UE 1, currently within the coverage area of an NTN TRP 142, indicated by a double contour, detects signal identity information associated with that NTN TRP, to identify e.g. one or more of TRP ID, satellite ID, optionally beam ID. The UE 1 indicates the TRP ID, optionally with beam ID, at a given time to the positioning node 160. Based on the received information, the positioning node 160 provides trajectory information and reference signal properties, such as configuration, associated with that satellite ID and possibly of beams (marked with full contour) of further NTN TRPs 141, 14M which may be useful for facilitating positioning”)
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Rusek discloses claims 1 and 11, Rusek also receiving, by the network device, a second receiving time difference from the terminal device that indicates a difference between the time at which the terminal device receives the second reference signal and a time at which the terminal device receives a third reference signal, obtaining, by the network device, a second time interval that indicates a time interval between the moment at which the satellite sends the second reference signal and a moment at which the satellite sends the third reference signal, obtaining, by the network device, third coordinates, wherein that indicate a location at which the satellite sends the third reference signal, and determining, by the network device, the first location information based on the first coordinates, the second coordinates, the third coordinates, the first time interval, the second time interval, the first receiving time difference, and the second receiving time difference (abstract, figure 1 claim 24; “a user equipment, UE, for facilitating positioning of the UE in a communication network comprising a non-terrestrial access network of satellite-based access nodes, the method comprising: receiving at least two references signals which are transmitted at different occasions from the same satellite-based access node at different satellite trajectory positions; obtaining, for each received reference signal, a time stamp of reception and a reference signal occasion identifier conveyed in the reference signal, for calculation of a UE position”, claims 1, 5, page 17, line 23 - page 18, line 22; the measurement report is provided as RSTD/TDOA)
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Rusek discloses claims 7 and 17, Rusek also discloses determining, by the network device based on a second beam direction, the second reference signal and the third reference signal that correspond to the second receiving time difference, wherein the second beam direction is a beam direction in which the terminal device sends the second receiving time difference to the satellite, and determining, by the network device, the second time interval based on the sending time of the second reference signal and the sending time of the third reference signal (abstract figure 8 page 20 lines 5-27 “The UE 1, currently within the coverage area of an NTN TRP 142, indicated by a double contour, detects signal identity information associated with that NTN TRP, to identify e.g. one or more of TRP ID, satellite ID, optionally beam ID. The UE 1 indicates the TRP ID, optionally with beam ID, at a given time to the positioning node 160. Based on the received information, the positioning node 160 provides trajectory information and reference signal properties, such as configuration, associated with that satellite ID and possibly of beams (marked with full contour) of further NTN TRPs 141, 14M which may be useful for facilitating positioning”)
Regarding claims 9 and 19, Rusek discloses claims 8 and 18, Rusek also discloses an index of the first reference signal is different from an index of the third reference signal when the second beam direction is different from the first beam direction (abstract figure 8 page 20 lines 5-27 “The UE 1, currently within the coverage area of an NTN TRP 142, indicated by a double contour, detects signal identity information associated with that NTN TRP, to identify e.g. one or more of TRP ID, satellite ID, optionally beam ID. The UE 1 indicates the TRP ID, optionally with beam ID, at a given time to the positioning node 160. Based on the received information, the positioning node 160 provides trajectory information and reference signal properties, such as configuration, associated with that satellite ID and possibly of beams (marked with full contour) of further NTN TRPs 141, 14M which may be useful for facilitating positioning”)
Regarding claims 10 and 20, Rusek discloses claims 1 and 11, Rusek also discloses sending, by the network device, first indication information to the terminal device, wherein the first indication information indicates that the first reference signal and the second reference signal are used for positioning measurement (abstract, figure 1 claim 24; “a user equipment, UE, for facilitating positioning of the UE in a communication network comprising a non-terrestrial access network of satellite-based access nodes, the method comprising: receiving at least two references signals which are transmitted at different occasions from the same satellite-based access node at different satellite trajectory positions; obtaining, for each received reference signal, a time stamp of reception and a reference signal occasion identifier conveyed in the reference signal, for calculation of a UE position”, claims 1, 5, page 17, line 23 - page 18, line 22; the measurement report is provided as RSTD/TDOA)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 3-5 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rusek as applied to claims 2 and 12 above, and further in view of Lim (US 20150002334 A1).
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Rusek discloses claims 2 and 12, Rusek doesn’t specifically disclose the first reference signal and the second reference signal sent to the terminal device by the satellite are from the ground base station. Lim discloses the first reference signal and the second reference signal sent to the terminal device by the satellite are from the ground base station (figure 2 paragraphs [0072]-[0077] “ In accordance with an embodiment of the present invention, when the ground reference node 110 sends reference signals, it may send the reference signals to the different aerospace/satellite relay nodes 131, 132 and 133 at the same time”)
PNG
media_image2.png
350
561
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Rusek and Lim are analogous art because they are from the same filed of communications. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate in the Rusek disclosure the ground reference disclosed by Lim. The paging suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to use a well-known technique and to eliminate dependency from GPS signals (Lim paragraph [0012]). See also KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc. Case cited as 550 US (2007). In the KSR case, the Court stated that in certain circumstances what is obvious to try is also obvious, such as where "there is a design need or market pressure to solve a problem, and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." Regarding hindsight, the Court found that "[r]igid preventive rules that deny fact finders recourse to common sense . . . are neither necessary under our case law nor consistent with it." The Court stated that "familiar items may have obvious uses beyond their primary purposes," analogizing an obvious invention to the fitting together of pieces to a puzzle. The Court in this regard further stated that the person of ordinary skill is also a person of ordinary creativity, and not "an automaton."
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Rusek and Lim discloses claims 3 and 13, Lim also discloses obtaining, by the network device, a first feeding delay and a second feeding delay, wherein the first feeding delay is a transmission delay of the first reference signal from the ground base station to the satellite, and the second feeding delay is a transmission delay of the second reference signal from the ground base station to the satellite and determining, by the network device, the first location information based on the first coordinates, the second coordinates, the first receiving time difference, the first time interval, the first feeding delay, and the second feeding delay (figure 1 paragraphs [0072]-[0077] “ The reception node 120 calculates the distances between the reception node 120 and the three or more aerospace/satellite relay nodes 131, 132 and 133 by using received information about the locations of the aerospace/satellite relay nodes 131, 132 and 133 and the Time Differences Of Arrival (TDOAs) of the reference signals of the ground reference node 110 that arrive at the reception node 120 via the aerospace/satellite relay nodes 131, 132 and 133, thereby calculating the location of the reception node 120. “).
Regarding claims 5 and 15, Rusek discloses claims 1 and 11, Rusek doesn’t specifically disclose receiving, by the network device, second location information of the terminal device that is obtained through measurement by the terminal device from the terminal device and verifying whether the second location information is accurate. Lim discloses receiving, by the network device, second location information of the terminal device that is obtained through measurement by the terminal device from the terminal device and verifying whether the second location information is accurate (figure 2 paragraphs [0204]-[0206] “ can compare information about the locations of the aerospace/satellite relay nodes, calculated by the reception node, with location information transmitted by the ground reference node, and can supplement or compensate for the inaccuracy the location information by using the case where a single ground reference node and three or more aerospace/satellite relay nodes are used and the case where three or more ground reference nodes and three or more aerospace/satellite relay nodes are used in parallel.”) Rusek and Lim are analogous art because they are from the same filed of communications. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate in the Rusek disclosure the ground reference disclosed by Lim. The paging suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to use a well-known technique and to eliminate dependency from GPS signals (Lim paragraph [0012]). See also KSR above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Ghimire (US 20230358843 A1) discloses measurement and signaling for enabling position determination in networks including non-terrestrial components.
Jeong (US 20120157115 A1) discloses method and apparatus for updating access point information for location measurement.
Ho (US 7667640 B2 ) discloses determining a geolocation solution of an emitter on earth using satellite signals.
Rusek (US 20230408706 A1) discloses method for positioning in a non-terrestrial communications network.
Ma (US 20230023056 A1) discloses positioning reference signal repetition duration for non-terrestrial networks.
Supplementary European search report dated 10/17/2025 for EP23851594.
European search opinion dated 10/17/2025 for EP23851594.
First notice of examination opinions dated 03/19/2026 for CN202210957694.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN A TORRES whose telephone number is (571) 272-3119. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kenneth N Vanderpuye can be reached at (571) 272-3078. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JUAN A TORRES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2634
Prosecution Insights